The government doesn't have the right to tell us how, or what to eat. There are more important issues that they should be concerned with.

I think that people should retain the rights for what they eat. If you don't like Foie Gras or you don't agree with the way the animals are raised then don't eat it and or don't patronize restaurants that offer and serve the dish.

I don not believe a any government should be able to dictate or create laws to restrict what we eat. The governments main issue is animal cruelty. However this is obviously political. If animal cruelty was the issue, there would be major regulation and banning of fast food production. The government is aware of the conditions we raise our chickens, for example, let alone the genetic engineering we have do the chickens. Is that not animal cruelty? Since it is obvious that animal cruelty is not the real issue; I see no reason for the government to legislate what we eat.

Is banning Foie Gras really going to change anything besides food on somebody's plate? If people have learned they love enlarged liver, they will find a way to get it. Veil is banned from a lot of places but i can still go and find a restaurant that serves it. If the government is so worried about the types of meat we eat, shouldn't they be trying to ban how cattle are being stacked up on top of each other so we can all enjoy a cheeseburger. It's really not something that they should be concerned with right now.

Essentially this isn't even about the foie gras. Its about freedom of rights, this just happens to be one of those sticky situations that make it complicated. Its like banning plan B, its killing the baby, but its better than abortion? Do women have the right to choose or does the government? Its the same thing, it may be cruelty to animals but how many rights will we let the government take from us? So, what happens if we say yes to this, and then something else, eventually they will take it all away. They could pass a law saying you can't say " i want to kill you" in public, and everyone's like "well i guess that makes sense" but then your empowering them to start taking other free speech away. Have we not the right to oppose our government if we do not see it fit? I suppose a solution would be that we would have to get the foie gras imported, that we cannot do that to animals in the U.S. My question though is whats considered animal cruelty? I think of animal cruelty as raising animals to kill and eat. Should we make everyone become a vegetarian? No, thats taking away our rights, just like banning the eating of it.

The more we give the government power to rule over the small things like what we eat and serve, the less we will realize that the big things are getting controlled too. soon we will not have a say, and as far as i have learned about the foundations of the USA, it has been founded on freedom and the right to choose. Like the famous story about the pastor wanting to move the organ all the way across the room, but the people would not have it; his solution move it bit by bit so they wouldn't notice the small changes. We too will have the little things like foie gras (not that i have the appetite for such a thing) taken away from us, then it might very soon be our freedom all together. "Stand up and say no to banning Foie Gras"!

I believe the government has no right to ban Foie Gras. Yes I have a big issue with cruelty to animals, but we eat awkward things everyday. In Ecuador they eat guinea pigs(cuy), Asia they eat amaradillos, Korea they eat dogs and cats. That is their culture so why interfere with that. Yes it may be an unappealing thing to eat but people seem to like it. I think the goverment should stay out of the food business. If it is not posionous, deadly or anything dangerous then let them eat it. If you are going to ban this particular dish, you might as well ban everything else that may seem unappealing.

The government already has to much control I see no reason to give them more.

Fois Gras my be some kind of torture in some way but we have to think about how if we keep giving the government more and more power they are going to have power over everything. This is a very complicated situation to agree or disagree on only because so many people think it as animal abuse but if you really think about it, in France this is something that is mass produced because its something that France is very well known for so how could the government just take it all away from these people when they have been doing this for so long? I believe that if you give them (the government) an inch they are going to take a mile as they always do not matter the situation. If you give a kid a piece of candy they are always going to want more just as you give the government some rights they are going to take it all away from us and we are not going to have our rights anymore. I think that you can eat whatever you want no matter what. If people were starving the government would not be banning Foie Gras. Have they thought about the people in Hati? Or even just the regular every day people who are trying really hard to just put food on the table? Its hard to see it this way in a lot of peoples eyes but this is how I see it.

I belive the people have the right to eat what they want. If this debate were in another country there would be no arguement just opinion. The fact is we americans try to justify what is right and what is wrong for the world. But in fact the governmet controls what is right and what is wrong in so many different ways, why do they need to control what we eat?!!!

I believe that they have no right to ban this delicacy. We eat chicken and ducks don't we? So, I see no real point in trying to ban the eating of such a food. Compare it to the eating of CUY (guinea pig). That is considered to be a delicacy or staple food in South America. Yet here in America we have guinea pigs for pets. We look at people with disgust at the thought of eating something like that. But to them it is just a normal way of life. Just as is the eating of foie gras. It's perfectly normal to the people who eat it. Why should we take that away from them? That would be like trying to take a hamburger and fries out of the hands and mouths of almost any American. It's normal to us. Eating foie gras is just as normal to them.

I think banning Foie Gras is not a good idea. What next double cheeseburgers? Seems like we have a law for everything nowadays. Instead of adding another law maybe we should get rid of one. If people don't like the way Foie Gras comes to be then they have the option not to support it with the vote of the dollar.

It may not be right to force feed birds but its not right to inject cows or chickens with hormones either. Think they are doing it because they (the government) hasn't found a way to get in there and make out a big enough cut maybe . i think we should all have the choice to eat what we want. I don't think they should ban it.

I think that this has nothing to do with the governments power to ban everything, but pertains to the particular instance. I don't like how the animals are raised, but they are raised for food, and unless you are a vegetarian i think you are a hippocrite to say that they can ban it. Afterall, the ducks are going to be killed which is a lot worse than having pain.

No, I don't think they should have the right to ban it. Since when should the government decide what we should and shouldn't eat? This is America after all, land of the free!

The "traditional" way is to force feed the animal, now that is wrong. But if you read on it says a more conventional way is natural feeding. So if there was a reg put onto force feeding rather then prohibiting it that would have been better. I think that the Government over stepped its bondaries here. BOOOOO on the Government for that one. And another thing - I use to live in front of a pond, have you ever seen a tame goose or duck be feed? They hardley need to be forced to eat their on body weight in bread in just under a minute. like i said force feeding is bad, but its not hard at all to get a goose or duck overly fat naturally feeding it. every one is assuming that every goose or duck used for Foie Gras is force feed. and we all know what assume means... makes an ASS out of U and ME. Not sorry to offend.

Wow! How could the government really take it that far. As humans I think we have eaten everything in the book. What is the difference between eating a duck and rabbit or even a lamb? If this is animal cruelty, we just lost all of the butchers for taking a cow, chicken, and pigs life. God created animals knowing that they would be our food supply along with vegetation. Whether we choose to eat animal meat or not is a PERSONAL preference. What would the government do next, maybe shipping mandatory groceries to our homes instead of choosing our family meals at the grocery store?!

i don't agree with the decision to band foreign gas. the government could offer rewords to those who chose to not use foreign gas but until the government comes up with a substitute i simply don't see the decision as being justified. The governemt id supposed to be there to support the peoples best interest, telling people what they can and cant do dose not fall under the protection of the people.

Although I think it is inhumane how people go about making foie gras, I think that the government does not have the right to ban it from being served as a dish. The way the meat industry conducts their business, in my opinion, is completely inhumane...all the added hormones and the living conditions of the poor animals! But that's not against the law...The goverment already has too many rules for us. Isn't this supposed to be a free country? To a certain extent, rules and regulations help keep control over society, but what happened to our independence???...the right to eat what we want to eat? If someone wants to eat foie gras, they should be allowed to eat it! Why should their be a law against it?! There are so many rules in this world, what about our liberty and freedom?

I dont agree with any government banning the rights we have been given to us layed down in the constitution.The us government has already made it almost impossible to be a true individual so banning a type of food is just one more thing to control us by. But at the same time if it was canabalism we would all agree with them banning it so that says something about what is socialy acceptable.

I wrote in last night, as I have been reading a lot of information about food, I have begun to stew. I would like to repeat that I am not for the hurting of animals, however i am a little incensed that we are sitting around worried about the ducks when there are much bigger issues, that are much worse. I realize that to quote a song is a bit cheesy, but the band James has it correct when they sing, "If you wanna change the world shuit your mouth and start this minute!" While we waste time, me included, sitting around and whining about the world, we could actively be doing something. With that said, see ya later!

What gives anyone the right to choose what another person eats, no matter what it is? I don't eat organic things and never will. I hate organic food, so does that give me the right to try to get it bannned? NO! If you don't like what the food or agree with how it is processed it's simply stay away from it.

I don't believe it! It's pretty ridiculous that they would ban it for animal cruelty when we eat pigs, cows, lamb etc. People eat duck and geese, so why ban just the liver? What else would you use it for? Why not ban eating duck or geese in general? It's pretty dumb that they are trying to control everything, even what we eat.

Whether it is an animal or not individual people are capable of making their own coherent decisions on what they think is wrong or right. If someone likes it then it is going to be hard to stop them from eating foie gras. A ban will only cause them to go around legal boundaries to find and eat it so i don't see as putting a ban on it as solving any problems. Strictly speaking it is an individuals right to eat what they choose and no one should be able to tell them that their personal preferences are not up to them

I don't think anyone has the right to tell us what we can eat, or what we can serve in a restaurant, but I do have a problem with the force feeding of the ducks. In my opinion, it is just wrong, I mean, how would you like someone to force feed you?

We have been eating animals for a very long time now. I do not believe it is cruelty I believe it is the way of the food chain. We should be able to choose what we consume, it is our bodies not the governments. They cannot own what you consume.

I Agree it is just one more thingfor thr government to control. I donot agree with the pain the animal may have to endure but as long as humans are not being eatin then we should be fine but Duck is an animal and like the food chain we are above so be it.

I really don't think the government should have any kind of power over what we sell. I see a lot of comments about prolonged misery for animals. If we really want to talk about animal cruelty, should the government then also ban the eating of beef, chicken, or pork because the animals are pretty much tortured by poor diets and crowded living areas before they are slaughtered which ultimately brings them pain, no, so why is eating the liver of another animal all of a sudden considered cruelty? I think people should be able to eat whatever it is they want to eat, its how the food chain works. That is my thoughts on this subject anyway.

I have a difficult time with the fact that our government has their hand in anything these days let alone, what we eat! The city of Chicago has no right to ban foie gras. Different cultures, religions, households and communities eat different things. Does this mean that we will ban peanut sauce for Thai food or red wine for communion? Last time I checked, I was the one who made the decision on what I was going to eat for dinner. If I wanted to eat some duck liver then that is what I would do! I am sorry but no one has the right to tell anyone what they can and cannot eat. As Brie mentioned, this would be just the beginning of a whole list of free acts the government would take away from us if this sort of action is allowed to go on. It is time for society to stand up for what they feel is right and to say 'NO' when it comes to the government making decisions for us.

What is really being debated here? Is it the cruelty to animals? Or can it be governmental intervention? I believe it is both and these are really to separate issues. Therefore with that being said let us rationally look at issue one which is the cruelty aspect of this discussion. To slaughter animals and leave their rotting bodies to waste seems rather cruel. To use the animal for consumption does not constitute cruelty but usefulness. If you torture an animal before you eat it would obviously constitute improper treatment. Are you seeing my progression here? The issue becomes relevant by what you or the government consider mal treatment of an animal that can be consumed by a human being.

The city has not wright to ban food and they have come to their senses and voted to repeal the law.

The alderman whom Mayor Daley derisively calls Joe "Foie Gras" Moore (49th) now knows how the geese and ducks feel.

Two years after the City Council banned the liver delicacy made by jamming a steel pipe down a bird’s esophagus, Daley essentially did the same to Moore on the City Council floor.

By a vote of 37-6, the foie gras ban that Daley claims made Chicago an international laughingstock was repealed, thanks to a legislative end-run that set a new standard for violating protocol and rolling over the opposition.

I believe that all animals were placed here for human consumption and i find it hard to understand when laws are enacted to restrict their consumption. Animals should not be abused but we should be able to eat a food that dates back many generations.

The gov't has taken too much athority in what they allow and donot allow already... many issues are not even open to us for debate noe voting i strongly oppose the gov't in the element for which it now stands, against the people in general is much to controlling already..

The government has absolutely NO right to ban any type of food. We as Americans should get off ous lazy a*% and take a look at what rights we are losing everyday. The government is taking away our rights and freedoms right in front of our noses. I believe that if we dont stop the government from sticking its nose where it dosen't belong on something as infinitesimal as this. Then we will be waking up to much larger ban's and government control on things that actually matter.

The government does not have the right to tell people what to eat. The more the government extends its power the more powerful it will become. I do not agree about eating Foie Gras but it is my right to decide to eat it or not. It is not the governments concern; it has nothing to do with the government what I choose to eat. There are so many other issues that the government should be concerning itself with. It is a total waist of power and the taxpayers money for the government to be concerning itself about what the taxpayers are eating. There are far more better things the government should be doing to help the American public.

I think it should be the American's choice as to whether or not he or she wants to eat Foie Gras. This goes for any food.

I think it's wrong to ban it, it wont make any difference in the manufacture of the stuff, if people want it all they have to do is get it from outside city limits, you can even get it off e-bay and it will be delivered so all their doing is removing one item from restaurant menus and grocers shelves making it harder for them to make a living. If their trying to make a moral stand why not also ban McDonalds and all food that is not organic. What about medicines and Cosmetics that have been tested on animals I bet these are still all available within city limits.

Out of interest is this ban for all Foie Gras or just Gavage Foie Gras, an outright ban on all of it is just stupid as it is only Gavage Foie Gras that is made by force feeding the animal.

I've never even heard of Foie Gras, but if it is animal meat, what gives them the right to ban it? I've eaten heart, liver, tongue - I don't care for the taste, but I would never ban it.